290 
58 
PV 1 



letin of the University of Georgia 



ume XXIII 



Elijah Clarke's Foreign Intrigues and 
the "Trans-Oconee Republic" 










imber, N< 






ELIJAH CLARKE'S FOREIGN INTRIGUES AND THE 
"TRANS-OCONEE REPUBLIC" 

E. Merton Coulter, Ph. D. 

Department op History and Political Science 

^ In the early days of the American republic, foreign nations 
failed to respect the independent position which had been at- 
tained by this new government. Rather, they considered it 
legitimate ground for intrigues, a remnant for a "tail to the 
European kite." And indeed many Americans themselves, still 
swayed by the passions of the Revolution and unsettled from its 
turmoils, had not come to realize the part that law and order 
were to play. As a result, they too often became the willing 
tools of foreign powers ; or, mistaking their own wild ambitions 
for patriotism, they engaged in ventures that, to say the least, 
tended toward the destruction of state and nation. Successive 
inrigues by England, France, and Spain are too well known to 
mention ; so are the contributory ventures of such men as James 
Wilkinson, Burr, and George Rogers Clark. Not so well known, 
but of equal importance in their possibilities, were certain pro- 
jects by Elijah Clarke. His name is linked with two ventures, 
which, though in ultimate purposes entirely separated, were in 
conception closely related. Hence it has been deemed proper 
to treat both in the same paper. 

Elijah Clarke was a bold partisan leader in Georgia during 
the Revolution. He took a conspicuous part in the war of exter- 
mination waged between the Whigs and Tories throughout the 
Southern frontiers from the Carolina* to Florida. He came out 
of the struggle an inveterate foe to Great Britain, with his 
strong native passions intensified and with a. consciousness of 
important powers wielded in the past and still capable of use. 
After the Revolution he found a vent for his restless nature in 
the Creek wars that sprung up all along the frontier. But hazy 
ambitions for greater things began to form, and in following 
these Clarke failed to define clearly the limit where patriotism 
ended and movements destructive to his government began. The 
arrival of Genet in Charleston in 1793 with his schemes of 



conquest gave Clarke his first opportunity to further his larger 
ambitions. 1 

Genet's proposed conquest of the Spanish possessions con- 
templated two important expeditions : one to gather in the Ohio 
River country under George Rogers Clark, to float down the 
Mississippi to take Louisiana ; the other to be made up in South 
Carolina and Georgia to march on East and West Florida. 
Genet left the active management of affairs in this latter ven- 
ture to Mangourit, the French consul at Charleston. Samuel 
Hammond and William Tate were his chief lieutenants in South 
Carolina. 2 Elijah Clarke was to be intrusted with Georgia's 
part, responsible especially for enlisting the Georgians and the 
Creek and Cherokee Indians. 3 A number of elements entered 
into the situation as far as Clarke and the Georgians were con- 
cerned. As before noted, Clarke had a violent hatred of the 
British. For that reason, if for no other, he would have been 



i Elijah Clarke left North Carolina in 1774 and settled in Wilkes 
County, Georgia. He was a major general in the Georgia forces during 
the Revolution, commanding in the battle of Kettle Creek and taking 
an important part in skirmishes in South Carolina leading up to the 
battle of King's Mountain. See A. D. Candler and C. A. Evans, 
Cyclopedia of Georgia (Atlanta, 1906), 1:396; L. C. Draper, Kings 
Mountain and its Heroes (Cincinnati, 1881), passim; J. C. Harris, 
Georgia (New York, 1896), 88-96. 

The following is an example of Clarke's strong-willed nature. On the 
failure of the grand jury to find a true bill against a trifling fellow 
whom Clarke had accused of horse-stealing, he seized him, and followed 
by the jury and judge, marched him to the place of the theft, intent on 
hanging him. He desisted only after the judge had made an eloquent 
appeal for law and order. G. R. Gilmer, Sketches of Some of the First 
Settlers of Upper Georgia, of the Cherokees, and of the Author (New 
York, 1855), 185. 

2 Hammond was not previously unknown to Clarke, both having 
fought together in the battles of Cedar (Springs and Musgrove's Hill 
in the Revolution. George White, Historical Collections of Georgia 
Containing the most Interesting Facts, Traditions, Biographical 
Sketches, Anecdotes, Etc., Relating to its History and Antiquities, from 
its First Settlement to the Present Time (New York, 1854), 625, 626. 
F. J. Turner, "The Mangourit correspondence in respect to Genet's pro- 
jected attack upon the Floridas, 1793-94," in American Historical Asso- 
ciation, Annual Report, 1897 (Washington, 1898), 569-574. 

3 The fact that two men prominent in this movement bore the name 
Clark (Elijah Clarke spelled his name with a final e, but this was not 
always adhered to) has led to considerable confusion in early dispatches 
as well as in later accounts. For example, in the American State 
Papers: Foreign Relations, volume 1, index, p. v, George Rogers Clark 
and Elijah Clarke are listed as "General Clarke," and this results in a 
confusion of the doings of the Kentucky and Mississippi River expedi- 
tion with the Georgia and Floridas affair. 



in favor of aiding the French. Georgians in general were lean- 
ing toward Jefferson and French sympathies as opposed to the 
Federalists and British sentiment. This state of mind uncon- 
sciously predisposed many to wink at the venture if not to open- 
ly aid it. Clarke as well as many other land-hungry Georgians 
had with deep dissatisfaction seen the Federal Government make 
treaties with the Creeks and Cherokees which seemed to exclude 
white settlers forever from large tracts of land. Why not then 
follow the French for three months and take advantage of large 
bounties in land offered in the Floridas and in Louisiana? 4 
Clarke was also very popular in Georgia, and he knew that he 
could draw a considerable following with him in any venture he 
should choose. A large gathering of officers in Georgia agreed 
to enter the French service on hearing that Clarke would be a 
leader. 5 There was also the traditional hatred of the Georgians 
against the Spaniards in Florida, especially intensified by their 
recent plottings with the Indians. 

Clarke entered actively into the service of the French in the 
fall of 1793, receiving the commission of a major general with an 
annual salary of $10,000. He immediately set to work enlisting 
Georgians for the enterprise. Many veterans of the Revolution 
who had served with him in that war joined him again. Agents 
were sent out to many points with ample supplies of money to 
enlist men and buy provisions, some carrying as much as $10,000 
with them. 6 Different points in Georgia were designated as 
posts for rendezvous preparatory to proceeding to St. Mary's, 
the general rendezvous for all troops from both ,South Carolina 
and Georgia. The collecting posts in upper Georgia were mostly 
on the Ind ian land where the governor of Georgia supposedly 

* A committee appointed by the South Carolina house of representa- 

U^^ST^if !f h he GeDet affair reP ° rted: " Many citizensTthe 
United States have been . . . seduced from their duty by insidious 

arts practiced on their kindred affections to the French repubHc " 

American State Papers: Foreign Relations. 1:309. See also ibid 459 

5 Hammond said that at this meeting the officers unanimously ex- 
S Zt™?Jr \ re $° enteT the ventu ™ immediately "as General cfarke 
is determined to follow me to aid in the conquest of east Florida " 

^"^rj^.TsTrrMe ^" in American Historicai Associa - 

6 T. S. Arthur and W. H. Carpenter, The History of Georaia from i±m 
Earliest settlement to the Present Time (Philadelphia, isl ) 21)1 292 
W. B. Stevens, History of Georgia (Philadelphia, 1859), 2-405- AH 
Chappell Miscellanies of Georgia (Atlanta, 1874), 40; American State 
Papers: Foreign Relations, 1:459 American state 



had no control and to which, indeed, the United States could not 
lay undisputed claim. Troops from the up-country were to 
assemble on the west side of the Oconee River opposite Greens- 
borough, and troops from the central part of the state were to 
gather on the same river opposite Kerr's Bluff. 7 The whole 
length of the Georiga frontier from Tennessee to the Florida 
line was at this time in a state of great unrest. Private parties 
were gathering at numerous places bent on invading the Creek 
country ; half-organized commands were camping here and there 
supposedly to fight the Creeks ; and, to make the conditions still 
more unsettled, the Georgia militia and the Federal troops which 
were scattered in different forts and camps mostly along the 
Oconee River were actuated by no friendly feelings toward each 
other. Out of these discordant elements Clarke was enlisting 
his recruits. And it can scarcely be doubted that he was using 
hostility to the Creeks as a cloak for his real designs. 8 At the 
same time efforts were being made to enlist as many Creeks and 
Cherokees as possible and to make friends with the remainder. 
Genet was enabled to use this as proof against the charge that 
he was plotting on American territory against Spain, claiming 
that certain persons had merely agreed "to go among the inde- 
pendent Indian tribes, ancient friends and allies of France," to 
enlist their aid. 9 

Clarke seems to have made considerable progress in gathering 



7 Turner, "Mangourit correspondence," in American Historical As- 
sociation, Annual Report, 1897, pp. 635, 636. 

8 Henry Knox, secretary of war, in a statement to the United States 
Senate, December 16, 1793, said: "The present state of this part of the 
frontier involves national considerations of great magnitude whether 
viewed as relative to the expense which has been incurred during the 
past summer, of which payment will most probably be demanded of the 
United States, whether with regard to the claims of the Governor of 
Georgia, of a right of interference in any treaty with the Creeks, which 
is presumed to be contrary to the constitution of the United States, or 
whether with regard to a war with the powerful tribes of the Creeks, 
with the long and almost unlimited train of collateral and consequent 
evils attendant thereon, a measure which may perhaps be avoided, if 
means could be devised to keep the bold and turbulent of both sides in 
order." American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:362. Ibid., 361-429 
passim. 

9 American State Papers: Foreign Relations, 1:311. A plan for a 
treaty of alliance and friendship with the Creeks may be found in Tur- 
ner, "Mangourit correspondence" in American Historical Association, 
Annual Report, 1897, pp. 591-593. Many Creeks and Cherokees were 
enlisted, according to Arthur and Carpenter, History of Georgia, 291, 
292. 



men. According to the commander of the Federal troops in 
Georgia, the French " appear to have many friends in this un- 
dertaking among the inhabitants of this State." He said three 
hundred men from upper Georgia were expected to join eighty 
others encamped on the St. Mary 's River, and that these together 
with a French sloop of war would "be sufficient, they say, to 
take the Floridas as soon as they please." This service was 
especially attractive to the United States troops, many of whom 
agreed to join the French "on the expiration of their engage- 
ments with the United States." Some, however, did not wait 
for this, but, prevailed upon by Clarke's recruiting agents, de- 
serted outright. Clarke became fearful of immediate trouble 
with the United iStates if this procedure were kept up. Major 
Williamson, paymaster of Clarke's troops, wrote assuring a 
United States army officer, "General Clarke requested me to 
urge the necessity of not interfering with Government, partic- 
ularly in that of persuading the troops of the United States to 
desert and joint thorn ; and that, if he could find out that any offi- 
cer or soldier had acted in that manner, contrary to the interests 
of the United States, should be given into the hands of the law, 
and be published as the law directs." 10 

This unsettled state of affairs lasted throughout the winter 
of 1793-1794. The main work of Clarke during this period was 
to collect as many troops as possible on the Georgia frontier 
along the Oconee River and march them to the St. Mary's River, 
and from there make a descent in force on East Florida. After 
this province should be in his possession, he was to invade and 
seize West Florida. There was very little, if any, actual fight- 
ing. Clarke was busily engaged in recruiting and commanding 
troops on the Florida border at one time, and in the Oconee River 
region at another. He was reported to have attacked West 
Florida in October but to have been frustrated by the United 
States troops. In the following April he was back on the Oconee 
River ready to take command of troops gathering there; while 
in May he was reported to be on the Florida border again with 
from 150 to 300 men ready to join the French. 11 

This movement, so disruptive of law and order, could not go 

10 American State Papers: Foreign Relations, 1:459, 460. 

11 Turner, "Mangourit correspondence," in American Historical As- 
sociation, Annual Report, 1897, p. 669; American State Papers: Foreign 
Relations, 1:459, 460. 

5 



on long without being challenged from different quarters. The 
Spaniards were by no means unmindful of what was taking place. 
The governor of East Florida warned Governor Mathews of 
Georgia at different times "of the machinations that were put in 
motion" from Georgia, and urged in January that he exert 
his "utmost efforts till the said plot shall be entirely destroy- 
ed. ' ' 12 But the reputation of the Spaniards in Florida was none 
too good among the Georgians, so that for months the Georgia 
governor did nothing despite the fact that troop movements 
against Florida were well known. He knew how popular Clarke 
was among the Georgians. He also knew that most people in 
the state were sympathetic toward the venture as long as it was 
directed by the French against the Spaniards in Florida. Fin- 
ally, however, he was constrained to issue a proclamation on 
March 5, forbidding all persons in the state to join the adven- 
turers or to aid or assist them in any way. 13 The proclamation, 
however determined in tone, could accomplish nothing unless 
followed up by the force of the Georgia militia. This was not 
forthcoming. The French had little fear of the Georgia gov- 
ernor. According to the French consul at Charleston, "The 
Governor of Georgia, whose proclamation has appeared in our 
newspapers is a good republican — but his proclamation can- 
not influence the independent Indians, nor the others who have 
joined the French at St. Mary's." 14 Governor Mathews had 
frequent correspondence with Clarke during the latter part of 
this venture, the contents of which can never be known, as these 
letters have gone the route of many other valuable historical 
documents. 15 It is safe to infer, however, that Clarke was not 
convinced of any serious opposition from the governor. 

But Georgia had less to fear than did the Federal government. 



12 American State Papers: Foreign Relations, 462. 459; Arthur and 
Carpenter, History of Georgia, 292. 

13 American State Papers: Foreign Relations, 1:459. A copy of the 
proclamation may be found in the Minutes of the Executive Department, 
November 5, 1793, to September 23, 1796, manuscripts in the state 
archives in Atlanta, 66, 67. 

14 Turner, "Mangourit correspondence," in American Historical As- 
sociation, Annual Report, 1897, p. 653. 

15 The letter book of Governor Mathews containing this correspondence 
is described by U. B. Phillips, "Public archives of Georgia," in American 
Historical Association, Annual Report, 1903 (Washington, 1904), 1:451. 
A diligent search was made for it, but without success. It has un- 
doubtedly been destroyed since 1903, when the report was made. 

6 



It undoubtedly suited the Georgians well enough to wink at this 
expedition, but President Washington saw the complications that 
must inevitably follow with Spain. The war and state depart- 
ments had been in frequent communication with Governor Shelby 
of Kentucky relative to the expedition being fitted out against 
Louisiana. Conditions in Georgia had also been receiving the 
attention of the secretary of war. All the Federal troops in the 
state were offered to the governor to assist in putting a stop to 
the movement, but no call was made for them. In May, Henry 
Knox, the secretary of war, wrote Governor Mathews impressing 
upon him the gravity of the situation and informing him that 
Washington desired him to "take the most energetic and deci- 
sive measures within your power for suppressing the said de- 
sign. " In a message to Congress on May 20, 1794, Washington 
declared he had believed that the idea of a Spanish expedition 
had been abandoned. "But it appears to have been revived, 
upon principles which set public order at defiance, and place the 
peace of the United States at the discretion of unauthorized 
individuals." In the meantime, a few prosecutions had been 
entered against certain recruiting agents in Savannah. South 
Carolina was not so remiss in its duty as was 'Georgia. In De 
cember the general assembly of the former state decided to in- 
vestigate the machinations of Genet and called for prosecutions 
against any South Carolinians who had accepted commissions 
from the French and who were trying to recruit forces. 16 

But the whole scheme was soon destined to fall to pieces for 
reasons apart from all this. Genet had so conducted himself 
that in his short stay of a few months as French minister he had 
come into open conflict in numerous ways with the Federal gov 
ernment. His recall was soon demanded, and in November, 
1793, he was displaced by a French commission headed by 
Fauchet. Thus, in the very midst of his preparations for the 
Florida expedition, Genet was dismissed. Although this was 
disconcerting, it did not put an immediate stop to the scheme. 
Not until the following March did Fauchet issue a proclamation 
terminating the venture. But this expedition seemed to be 
easier started than stopped. Some of the most active prepara- 
tions were made during the two months following Fauchet 's 



16 American State Papers: Foreign Relations. 1:309, 455, 460. 

7 



proclamation. As late as May, Clarke was busy in the Oconee 
River region recruiting. Governor Mathews' proclamation men- 
tioned above, was issued only the day before Fauchet disbanded 
the forces. By the last of May the movement seems to have 
subsided completely. But as far as Georgia was concerned the 
aftermath came near being more serious than the original ven- 
ture. 



After the partisan warfare of the Revolution in which Clarke 
took such an important part was over, his experience as a fighter 
was not lost to th estate. He immediately took up the fight with 
the Creeks and the Cherokees and played a predominating role 
in the conflict with those tribes for the next decade. The char- 
acter of this war was such as to give ample play to those quali- 
ties of self-reliance and independent initiative that were so 
prominent in Clarke's nature. He made war and concluded 
peace with scant direction from the governor of the state. In 
1782 he went against the Cherokees, defeated them on the Chicka- 
mauga, and made peace with them, unauthorized, in the treaty of 
Long Swamp, whereby the Indians were forced to give up wide 
areas of land. Most of the provisions of this treaty were in- 
cluded in a new treaty regularly made the following year, but 
not entirely to Clarke's liking. On a number of other occasions 
Clarke was one of the commissioners appointed by the governor 
to treat with the Indians. In August of 1793 he was among the 
generals called in a council of war by Governor Telfair to confer 
on an expedition in force against the Creeks. It was decided to 
march into the Creek country with 5,000 troops in the following 
October. Washington interposed the authority of the Federal 
government against this campaign, and Clarke thereupon en- 
tered on his aforementioned Florida venture with Genet. He 
came out of it with a reputation undimmed and an ambition 
whetted for bolder schemes. 17 

When the Florida movement had about subsided, in May of 
1794, Clarke found himself on the Oconee River frontier, with 
an influence over numerous bodies of men gathered in that region 
which almost amounted to a complete commande over them, and 

17 U. B. Phillips, Georgia and State Rights (Washington, 1902), 67; 
Stevens, History of Georgia, 2:415, 417; White Historical Collections of 
Georgia, 123; Chappell, Miscellanies of Georgia, 47; American State 
Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:370. 

8 



Kith other men directly subject to his orders whom he had ex- 
pected to lead against the Floridas. Events had now prepared 
the way for a bold stroke. Nothing seemed more logical or feas- 
ible to Clarke than to march his men across the Oconee River 
into the Indian country and set up an independent government. 18 
Aside from the ease with which it seemed to him that this might 
be done, there were other important controlling reasons. Geor- 
gians in general were land-hungry. This movement owed many 
recruits to the genuine home-seekers, who found that all the land 
that had been ceded by the Indians had already been taken up. 
A large share of the constant troubles with the Indians was due 
to land encroachment or attempts at encroachment by the whites. 
In the words of a representative of the Indians to a Georgia, 
officer: "You well know, the cause of the discontent with us 
has ever been, the limits of our country; consider that we have 
retreated from the plains to the woods, from thence to the moun- 
tains; but no limits, established by nature or by compact, have 
stayed the ambitions, or satisfied your people." 19 The same 
ideas of government and law and order that characterized fron- 
tiersmen generally, possessed these people. As a later governor 
said, "They had slight comprehension of government, and but 
little use for that which they had, but as the instrument for sat- 
isfying their desire for more land." 20 Thus, there were numer- 
ous ill-defined schemes of individuals and groups of persons to 
enter onto the Indian country in one way or another. 21 A United 
States agent reported to the war department "that settling the 
lands on th e south side of the Oconee is a favorite object with 

"Chappell, Miscellanies of Georgia, 42; Narrative and Critical 

tSoZ 5^™^ u- ^ Ued by Justin Winsor ( B <>ston, 1888), 7 447 
Theodore Roosevelt, Winning of the West (New York, 1898) 4- 151 
wL Arth » r a nd Carpenter, History of Georgia, 293, 294. Roosevelt 
Winning of the West, 4:193, 194, confuses Clarke's French intrieues 
with his settlement, representing them as taking place at the same tfme 
and Clarke as masquerading at one time as a major general of The 
French army, with his men as the sans culottes, and at an^Ser tiSl 
2 405 ut ?' aD inde P endent government. Stevens, History of Georgia 
2 405 s so far wrong as to represent the French venture as a result of 
the failure of the trans-Oconee settlement. ven[Ure «» a result of 

19 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:371. 

"S™ r ; •***'??* ° f th€ First 8ettlers °f u PP er Georgia, 189. 
JS"?? bef ° re C i arke ' S att ^Pted settlement (in 1789) the 

ps/ooi^r s^LSSst. Clarke couId not *™z?:z d 



the inhabitants of the upper counties. ' ' The Indians also made 
the accusation to an offiicer of the Georgia militia ' ' that numbers 
of people wish to get possession of our lands, and are framing 
plans for that purpose. ' ' 22 

Another element that entered into the situation, complicating 
the land question, and thereby playing into the hands of Clarke, 
was the dealings of the United States government with the In- 
dians. As a checkmate to the influence of the Spaniards over the 
Creeks, Alexander McGillivray and other Creek chiefs were in- 
vited to New York, where a treaty was made with them in 1790, 
fixing the Oconee River as the boundary between the whites and 
the Indians and guaranteeing the lands west of that river to the 
latter. 23 It was unthinkable to the Georgians that such a treaty 
could be imposed upon them. It cut off completely the future 
growth of the state, limiting her territory to a comparatively 
narrow strip along the coatst and the Savannah River. If that 
treaty were enforced, the state was doomed to lose all her vast 
wastern domain, "the richest jewel the State of Georgia possess- 
es, and the real basis of her future wealth and rank in the 
Union." Under this provocation the land-hungry settlers be- 
came intensely hostile toward the Indians and had little more 
friendly feelings toward the Federal Government. One of them 
is reported to have said of the Federal agents attempting to make 
peace with the Indians, "that, instead of pacifying the Indians, 
they were only encouraging and paying them to destroy our 
frontier inhabitants; and, as Congress are a set of rascals, and 
the Secretary of War an enemy to his country, if he had it in his 
power, he would drown them in the sea ; observing, at the same 
time, that he was confident, the Executive officers of the Federal 
Government wished that the Indians might destroy the whole 
State of Georgia." The government of Georgia was by no 
means pleased with conditions. The governor declared that 



22 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:371, 500. 

23 Winsor, Narrative and Critical History, 7:447; Phillips, Georgia 
and State Rights, 41-43. 



10 



treaties with the Indians were null and void unless the state were 

given a part in their making. 24 

Clarke decided to take advantage of these discords that 
seemed to surround him on all sides. Leading an army of set- 
tlers into the Indian country would be very popular with these 
frontiersmen. The opposition of the people as well as of the 
state government to the treaty of New York, barring them from 
the trans-Oconee River region, further emboldened him to make 
the attempt. He feared no authority in Georgia, supported as he 
was by a large personal following and aided by a popular cause 
Certainly the governor of the state would not oppose him in 
breaking a treaty against which he himself had protested so vig- 
orously. Clarke seems to have been to a great extent an oppor- 
tunist. That he undertook the settlement was due very largely 
to the peculiar conditions and surroundings he found himself in 
Perhaps the thought of setting up an independent government 
was not entertained when he first began this movement, but 
this scheme gradually grew as he saw with what apparent 
ease it might be done. It has been argued that Clarke was 
actuated by the highest motives of loyalty to his state, seeing 
that it could never amount to much without the use of its western 
lands, and that after building up a separate republic he intended 
ultimately to annex it to Georgia, 25 

Clarke's movements at first attracted little attention. It was 
generally supposed that he was leading a party against the In- 
dians. Even when the parties began to settle down without 
opposing th e Indians, Governor Mathews guessed "that the ad- 

2 * American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:412, 414 499 in th* 
federal constitutional convention at Philadelphia .Georgia although 
one of the smallest states in population, had voted generally with the 

servTce o? tK F^ d * sres P ect to ever ? Person in the Immedfate 
service of the General Government, is so conspicuous and general 
among the inhabitants of this upper country, as, in my humble opinfou 
to give just reason to fear that the cause proceeds, in a great degree 
from a source in this State, which it ought not." hid 409 g ' 

-Uiappell, Miscellanies of Georgia, 54; L. L. Knight Standard 77« 
tory of Georgia and Georgians (Chicago, 1917), 1:380 383 

on iv£ v °7 HZ * tationecl . ° n the 0cone * River at Fort Mathews reported 
on May 7 that he was informed "that General Clarke is to cross here 
today with a number of militia; it is supposed with an intention to Take 
Twrlumul are at Montpelier " ±™*"» ^te PapeT Yf^n 

11 



venturers were part of those who had embarked in the French 
interest, and that, in a short time, they would of themselves dis- 
perse." 27 But as the venture soon began to take on all the 
characteristics of a permanent settlement, the governor was 
roused to action. He directed General Irwin, an old comrade-in- 
arms of Clarke's, to order the settlers to move. The order was 
obeyed, and in a short time the movement seems to have ended ; 
but only to break out again at a new place. In the middle of 
July the commander of the Federal troops in 'Georgia informed 
Governor Mathews that Clarke was encamping in the Indian 
country opposite Fort Fidius. Mathews demanded of Clarke 
an immediate removal of his settlers. Clarke refused in a very 
positive manner. A direct issue was here raised which smacked 
of treason and rebellion against the constituted authorities. 
Clarke expected widespread support throughout the frontier 
communities; Mathews did not feel reassured. 

The issue was now joined, and there was no other course 
for Governor Mathews but to continue. On July 28, he issued 
a proclamation reciting how Clarke had "induced numbers of 
the good citizens of the . . . State to join him" and strict- 
ly commanding and requiring "all judges, justices, sheriffs, and 
other officers, and all other good citizens of this State, to be dili- 
gent in aiding and assisting in apprehending the said Elijah 
Clarke and his adherents, in order that they may severally be 
brought to justice." He also issued an order to a judge of the 
superior court of Wilkes County to issue a warrant for the arrest 
of Clarke. But the latter, believing that he had the support of 
the great majority of the people, forestalled the procedure by 
voluntarily surrendering to the court. The judge, not greatly 
emboldened by conditions as he saw them, decided after consul- 
tation with the attorney-general not to issue the warrant, but 
instead to turn the case over to a board of four justices of the 
county. Tainted with the general demoralization that pervaded 
these regions, they released Clarke from further restraint, de- 
claring that, "it being our duty to do speedy justice to the said 
State, as well as the party charged, we proceeded to the most 
mature consideration of the cause, and, after an examination of 
the laws of the (State, and the treaties made, and laws passed, by 

21 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 495; White, Historical Col- 
lections of Georgia, 686. 

12 



the United States, do give it as our decided and unanimous 
opinion, that the said Elijah Clarke be, and is hereby, dis- 
charged. ' ' 28 

In Clarke's estimation this was one of the most important 
tests that should determine the success of the scheme ; and he had 
won a decided victory. Governor Mathews, on the other hand, 
was led "to conclude, there are too many who think favorably 
of the settlement; but I still flatter myself a large majority of 
the citiezns are opposed to such lawless acts." Clarke now 
began to push his settlement with redoubled vigor. He believed 
the militia would refuse to attack, even if the governor should 
have the temerity to order them against him. Many people now 
began to flock to Clarke's banner, who had hitherto held off for 
fear of the state government. A well organized settlement was 
soon begun, towns laid out, and a government set up. Fort 
Advance and Fort Defiance were erected as outposts. A pro- 
visional constitution was adopted, and a committee of safety 
chosen, with law-making powers. Clarke was made civil and 
military head of the government. 29 

The attitude of the Indians towards the settlement, since it was 
building on lands guaranteed to them by treaty, Clarke had to 
consider. With all his former bitter hostility toward them, still 
he commanded a certain respect from them and influence over 
them. There is no evidence of a formal agreement ever being 
made, but there was certainly a workable understanding sub- 
sisting. It was feared by the Federal Government that an agree- 
ment had been actually entered into, and that the governor of 
the state might be disposed to recognize it. It was urged that 
this should not deter him from breaking up the scheme, as it 
would otherwise afford a pernicious example for the future. A 
Federal agent reported to the secretary of war that " It is a singu- 
lar circumstance . . . that not the least opposition has been 
shown by the Indians to the settlements which were making on 
their lands, otherwise than by representations to the Governor, 



28 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:496, 595; Stevens, His- 
tory of Georgia, 2:402; White, Historical Collections of Georgia, 686, 
687; Arthur and Carpenter, History of Georgia, 294. 

29 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:495, 500, 501; Knight, 
Standard History of Georgia and Georgians, 381; Arthur and Car- 
penter, History of Georgia, 294; White, Historical Collections of Geor- 
gia, 687. 

13 



and they had at no time been more quiet than they are at pres- 
ent." 30 Answering an inquiry and complaint of the "headmen 
and warriors of the Creek nation" to the governor, he re- 
assured them that "The fort you complain of over the Oconee, 
is not built by my orders, nor your father, General Washington ; 
it is done by men acting without any authority. I am informed 
they intend to rent the land of you; but if you don't choose to 
let them live on it . . . you need not be uneasy about them ; 
your father, General Washington, will have them put off of it. ' ' 31 

As suggested above, the Federal Government had been viewing 
Clarke's maneuvers with some concern as to their outcome. 
During the early period of the settlement, while Governor 
Mathews was yet calculating the forces behind Clarke and had 
not yet taken a decided stand against the project, the Federal 
Government was becoming suspicious of affairs on the Georgia 
frontier. In the latter part of July the secretary of war in- 
formed Governor Mathews that he understood "a considerable 
body of people in the upper part of Georgia, have associated 
themselves for the purpose of setting up an independent govern- 
ment." He informed the Georgia governor that Washington 
"requests your Excellency to adopt the following line of con- 
duct, without delay: 

"1st. To warn, by proclamation, these disturbers of the 
peace, that they are offending against the laws of the United 
States and of Georgia, and that their attempts will be repelled 
by military force. 

"2d. To embody such parts of your militia as may be neces- 
sary to accomplish the business with decision. 



30 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:500, 502. A stringent 
law had been passed by Congress in 1793 against settlers entering into 
the Indian country. Ibid., 498. 

Fauchet, the French minister to the United States succeeding Genet, 
wrote his government on December 27, 1794, that "In Georgia the 
Creek Indians came very near taking up arms on account of the in- 
vasion of a few hundred adventurers who had enlisted for service in 
our expedition against the Floridas, and who since the abandonment 
of this project have thought of expatriating themselves and under the 
leadership of Major Clarke of taking possession of a portion of terri- 
tory which belongs to the savages." "Correspondence of the French 
minister to the United States, 1791-1797," edited by F. J. Turner, in 
American Historical Association, Annual Report, 1903, volume 2, p. 524. 

31 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:497. The protest of this 
body of Indians does not preclude the possibility of a tacit understand- 
ing with another faction. See also ibid., 499. 

14 



"3d. To call upon the commanding officer of the Federal 
troops in Georgia, who is instructed to obey your Excellency's 
orders, to co-operate in the removal of these settlers from the 
Indian lands." 

On the very day on which this communication was written 
Governor Mathews had issued his proclamation, before men- 
tioned, calling on Clarke to desist from his venture. Sub- 
sequent happenings, and especially the decision of the Wilkes 
County justices discharging Clarke and virtually declaring the 
treaty of New York null and void, were not very reassuring to 
President Washington. Two months later, Alexander Hamilton, 
in the absence of the secretary of war, wrote Governor Mathews 
that the governor of South Carolina had been requested to send 
the state militia to aid in putting down the undertaking, if the 
Georgia governor deemed it necessary. He also declared it 
"impossible to conceive a settlement more unjustifiable in its 
pretexts, or more dangerous in its principle. . . It is not only 
a high handed usurpation of the rights of the General and State 
Governments, and a most unwarrantable encroachment upon 
those of the Indians ; but, proceeding upon the idea of a separate 
and independent government, to be erected upon a military basis, 
it is essentially hostile to our republican systems of government, 
and is pregnant with incalculable mischiefs. It deeply concerns 
the great interests of the country that such an establishment 
should not be permitted to take root, and that the example should 
be checked by adequate punishment." 82 

There could be no doubt now as to the serious nature of the 
enterprise. Judge Walton in referring to the venture in his 
charge to the grand jury of Richmond County declared that "the 
moment is eventful . . . the eyes of the Union are necessar- 
ily turned toward this State." He believed that "A young 
country, scarcely recovered from former ravages, but with the 
means of progressive amplification and aggrandizement, to be 
involved in civil war, with all the evils incident to it, will have 
the effect of arresting its progress, and putting it in the back of 
any present calculation. ' ' But even a man of the stern patriot- 
ism of Judge Walton could not refer to Clarke in his present role 
without an appreciation of his past services: "With the gentle- 



32 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:501, 502. 

15 



man who directs this enterprise, I have been a long time in the 
habits of regard and friendship ; I have known his virtues, and 
esteemed them. In the long and arduous war, which produced 
our liberty and independence, he stands high in the lists of Revo- 
lutionary patriots and soldiers. But he himself will forgive 
and justify me, in detailing the laws against a scheme which 
tends to undermine the fair fabric he contributed to raise, and 
to subvert the order of that society, of which he has been so long 
an useful member. ' ,s 9 

But in the meantime, Governor Mathews had assumed a stern- 
er attitude, upon Clarke's entry on his project with renewed 
vigor and determination following his acquittal by the Wilkes 
County justices. In the latter part of August, he informed the 
secretary of war that "however unpleasant the task may be, of 
shedding the blood of acquaintances, and those whom we wish 
to view as fellow-citizens, yet the President may rest assured 
that no exertions on my part shall be wanting." As a last re- 
sort before beginning actual warfare, Governor Mathews sent 
General Twiggs, one of Clarke's old associates in many battles 
in the Revolution as well as against the Indians, to get him to 
desist. "Should the order not be obeyed, I shall lose no time in 
drawing together a force adequate to compelling them." This 
"he promised the secretary of war, at the same time asking what 
should be done with any prisoners that might be taken. Prob- 
ably he was fearful of the results, if Georgia should attempt to 
prosecute them. He was advised to turn them over to the Fed- 
eral court. A plan of campaign was now drawn up to be carried 
out by generals Twiggs and Irwin. The main purpose was to 
establish a blockade up and down the Oconee River to prevent 
provisions from being brought to Clarke and also to keep recruits 
from reaching him. For the time being no offensive meas- 
ures were to be undertaken. In fact no actual fighting was con- 
templated, as it was suposed that the blockade would bring 
about success. The command was admonished by Governor 
Mathews to conduct itself "with the greatest circumspection, 



33 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 498, 499. 

16 



and, in no instance, commit an act of hostility, unless in self- 
preservation. ' ' 34 

Clarke assumed a defiant attitude, and began to make active 
preparations to resist any attempt of troops to break up his 
settlement. He cheered his committee of safety with the as- 
surance that "the troops declare they will not fight against us." 
He also boldly declared, "I am determinated fixed to risk every 
thing, with my life, upon the issue, and for the success of the 
enterprise." In his estimation, a majority of the people of the 
state were with him in sentiment, and he was not afraid of being 
interfered with if the decision were left to the courts. He there- 
fore specifically ordered his men to refuse to surrender to the 
troops; but "you will cheerfully submit to be tried by a jury of 
your fellow-citizens." He even would be so bold as to try to use 
the processes of the courts to break the blockade against him. 
He declared the troops "have no right to take hold of any private 
property whatever, and, for everything detained, to the value 
of one shilling, belonging to any adventurer, they shall suffer 
the penalty of the law. If such case should turn up, apply to a 
magistrate, and bind the party offending to the next superior 
eourt." He furthermore stated that the orders of the secretary 
of war were "unconsitutional" and the governor's proclama- 
tion "illegal," as had been determined by the Wilkes County 
justices. 35 These were strange ideas and procedures for the 
head of an independent government to assume and undertake. 
It only goes to show how vague Clarke's understanding was of 
the consequences entailed by the new order he was attempting 
to set up . 

But despite Clarke's bold front, the Georgia troops were scat- 
tered all along the Oconee and proceeded to enforce the blockade. 
This determined action by the state was not expected by many of 
th Clarke followers. They had been relying on what they con- 
sidered to be public sentiment to prevent any opposition from 
the state ; but now they found many people siding against them. 
Large numbers of people who wanted land were not willing to 
go to the limits of defying their government to get it. When 
the issue b ecome clear-cut, the majority opinion even on the 

Zi IMd., 1:495, 496, 497, 503. 
^Ibid., 501. 

17 



frontier went against Clarke. Many soon came to believe with 
Judge Walton that they had no interest in supporting "the pre- 
tensions of a small part of the people — presensions without law, 
and resting not on the foundations of justice." In the latter 
part of September the Georgia troops were ordered to cross the 
river and proceed immediately against the settlements. When 
this movement began Clarke's men almost completely deserted 
him, so that on the twenty-eighth, when Fort Advance was 
taken, only twenty men remained with him. Before surrender- 
ing, Clarke and his men were promised protection in their per- 
sons and property. In the words of Governor Mathews, General 
Irwin "soon compelled the adventurers to propose relinquishing 
their unlawful attempts, and submit to the laws of their country. 
The posts are all burnt and destroyed, and the whole business 
happily terminated without the loss of blood." 36 

Although this summary action put a stop to this venture, and 
to any other such schemes by Clarke, it was a fruitful source 
of bitter partisan strife to follow. Clarke's influence was still 
so great that he not only escaped all punishment, although at- 
tempts were made to bring him to justice, but succeeded in 
creating a considerable reaction of sentiment against Governor 
Mathews. In his message to the general assembly on November 
3, 1794, the governor made this reference to the affair: "The 
daring unauthorized attempt of Elijah Clarke late a Major 
General of this State to form a settlement on the South West 
side of the Oconee is such a violation of Law & and every prin- 
ciple of good order, that I doubt not of receiving your support & 
concurrence in pursuing Such Measures against the leading 
characters concerned, as will deter others from engaging in Acts 
which have in their operation, a tendency toward envolving our 
fellow Citizens in the horrors of a civil war. ' ' He said the state 
was under much obligation to General Irwin for "reducing those 
refractory people without the loss of blood." He also defended 
his proclamation against Clarke, which "by some has been con- 
demned as oppressive and illegal. ' ' 37 

37 Minutes of the Executive Department, November 5, 1793, to Sep- 
tember 23, 1796, (Mss) p. 169. 

36 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 1:499, 500; White, His- 
torical Collections of Georgia, 687; Arthur and Carpenter, History of 
Georgia, 295. The number of men associated with Clarke at any time 
was probably not greater than three or four hundred. 

18 



Although Clarke's land schemes were never renewed, he was 
accused three years later by the Spanish minister to the United 
States of another plot against Florida. In a letter to the secre- 
tary of state the ambassador said, ' ' I know to a certainty that 
the English have made propositions to General Clarke of Geor- 
gia, in order to avail themselves of his influence in that State, 
together with some other persons, for making a diversion of seri- 
ous attack against Florida." Inquiry was made of the Federal 
district attorney for Georgia about this matter. In his reply he 
said, "I have made diligent inquiry, and cannot find any person 
here that knows any thing of the business, or that entertains a 
belief of the kind. Clarke was concerned in a former expedition 
against the Floridas, in conjunction with the French, and it is 
possible, from the circumstances, that he is again suspected. 
He is a man of strong passions, of warm partialities for the 
French, and violent antipathies to the English. From these 
circumstances, and from the matter being unknown to the citi- 
zens here, I am led to doubt the truth of the report altogether. ' ' 
Secretary Pickering's later inquiries of the British envoy failed 
to clarify completely British machinations regarding Florida. 
The latter admitted that "some persons did actually propose to 
me a plan for an attack on the Floridas," but none "expressed 
sentiments that were in any degree hostile to the interests of the 
United States." 38 Clarke's past reputation for such ventures 
was perhaps more responsible for this accusation than any 
serious conversations he had ever had with the British. 

Although these various machinations of Clarke's never suc- 
ceeded in getting very far, they might have caused much mis- 
chief to state and nation had the sufferance of the authorities 
allowed them to proceed further. Clarke himself was a rather 
remarkable man, a typical product of his time and surroundings. 
His ventures were not the deep-laid plots of a dangerous man. 
He rather happened upon them, and their ultimate purposes 
grew as they proceeded. He wai an uneducated frontiersman, 



38 American State Papers: Foreign Relations, 2:68, 71. The French 
consul general at Philadelphia believed that Clarke had been offered 
something by the British to invade Florida. "Correspondence of the 
Frnch ministers," (Turner, ed.), in American Historical Association, 
Annual Report, 1903, 2:1037. 

19 



and a partisan fighter at all times, whether he opposed the 
British or the Indians, or engaged in the political animosities 
of the day. His services to his state were important and last- 
ing; his mistakes were soon forgotten. Twenty-five years after 
his death, he was characterized as "not only a patriot of the 
Revolution, but as honest, daring, and intrepid a spirit as ever 
breathed." 39 In 1799, the commander-in-chief of the Georgia 
militia announced in a general order ' ' that the gallant old veter- 
an, the late major general Clarke, of G-eorgia, whose name ought 
to be so dear to this and the United States, for his truly heroic 
exploits is dead. ' ' It was, therefore, ordered that all officers for 
one month "do wear ... a crepe around the left arm, as a 
token of that affection which the government and military bear 
to his memory, for his great patriotic, and military exertions, 
during the revolutionary war." 40 The Augusta Herald in an- 
nouncing his death, referred to him as a "late Major General of 
this state, whose meritorious achievements during the late revo- 
lution are so well known, we deem it unnecessary to particu- 
larize." 41 ,So, whatever may have been his indiscretions, he 
always retained a large number of admirers, and by the time 
of his death had generally regained the esteem of his state. 



39 American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 2:792. There is absolutely 
no taint on the name of Elijah Clarke among Georgians today. One of 
the counties of the state (laid off and named in 1801) bears his name, 
and a monument has been erected to his memory in the city of Athens. 

40 Georgia Gazette, January 2, 1800. 

41 December 25, 1799. 

20 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



014 418 882 2 



